[Bug 188542] Review Request: hylafax

[bugzilla at redhat.com]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.

Summary: Review Request: hylafax


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=188542


bugzilla at redhat.com changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
            Version|devel                       |rawhide




------- Additional Comments From tibbs at math.uh.edu  2008-01-18 02:18 EST -------
Wow, this is still going.  I had some time so I built it.  It builds fine on rawhide; here's the latest rpmlint output:

  hylafax.src:66: E: configure-without-libdir-spec
This is bogus.

  hylafax.src: W: invalid-license BSD-like
This isn't a permitted license tag; if the license really doesn't correspond
to one of those on http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Licensing then talk to spot
and have him cook up another tag for you.

  hylafax.x86_64: E: executable-marked-as-config-file /etc/cron.hourly/hylafax
  hylafax.x86_64: E: executable-marked-as-config-file /etc/cron.daily/hylafax
Not problematic.

  hylafax.x86_64: W: incoherent-version-in-changelog 5.1.11-1 5.1.11-2.fc9
Release: is 2 but the last changelog is for release 1.  You should changelog
each release bump.

  hylafax.x86_64: W: file-not-utf8 /usr/share/doc/hylafax-5.1.11/CONTRIBUTORS
This should be passed through iconv.

  hylafax.x86_64: W: non-conffile-in-etc /etc/hylafax/faxcover_example_sgi.ps
Not really sure what to do about this one.  Maybe it should be installed with
the documentation instead.

  hylafax.x86_64: E: executable-marked-as-config-file /etc/rc.d/init.d/hylafax
initscripts shouldn't be marked as %config.

  hylafax.x86_64: E: explicit-lib-dependency libtiff
You shouldn't have Requires: libtiff; rpm will figure out the library
dependency by itself.

  hylafax.x86_64: E: script-without-shebang /usr/sbin/faxsetup.linux
If this is a shell script, it needs a #! line.  If it's not, it shouldn't be
executable and it certainly shouldn't be in /usr/sbin.

  hylafax.x86_64: E: script-without-shebang /var/spool/hylafax/bin/dict/ro
  hylafax.x86_64: E: script-without-shebang /var/spool/hylafax/bin/dict/pt_BR
  hylafax.x86_64: E: script-without-shebang /var/spool/hylafax/bin/dict/fr
  hylafax.x86_64: E: script-without-shebang /var/spool/hylafax/bin/dict/pl
  hylafax.x86_64: E: script-without-shebang /var/spool/hylafax/bin/dict/pt
  hylafax.x86_64: E: script-without-shebang /var/spool/hylafax/bin/dict/de
  hylafax.x86_64: E: script-without-shebang /var/spool/hylafax/bin/dict/es
  hylafax.x86_64: E: script-without-shebang /var/spool/hylafax/bin/dict/en
  hylafax.x86_64: E: script-without-shebang /var/spool/hylafax/bin/dict/tr
  hylafax.x86_64: E: script-without-shebang /var/spool/hylafax/bin/dict/it
This is pretty odd.  What are executables doing under /var/spool?  And
regardless of where they are, either they shouldn't be executable or they
should have #! lines so that they can actually be executed.


-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact.